# Has Cigar Aficionado Gone Mad?



## Nathan King (Nov 4, 2010)

I was perusing the cigar review section of the April 2011 Cigar Aficionado magazine and was surprised by some of the ratings. I generally tend to agree with their ratings; however, I am puzzled by some of the scores in this magazine.

*Coronas:*

I'm a fan of the Padrón Londres for a nice inexpensive cigar, but it beats the OpusX PerfecXion No. 4? These two cigars are in a different league. The OpusX is much smoother with greater complexity. The Londres has some slightly bitter notes not present in its larger ring guage brethren.

*Figurados:*

The Casa Magna is still in a three-way tie for first. It doesn't belong on the list, and it is ahead of the Padrón 1926 40th Anniversary Maduro!?!? The Padrón is smoother at the hot nub than the Casa Magna will ever be at its best. Also, the Perdomo Lot 23 is tied with the OpusX Piramide? Again, the Perdomo doesn't belong on the list, and especially shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as OpusX.

Discuss!


----------



## primetime76 (Feb 8, 2011)

Nathan King said:


> I was perusing the cigar review section of the April 2011 Cigar Aficionado magazine and was surprised by some of the ratings. I generally tend to agree with their ratings; however, I am puzzled by some of the scores in this magazine.
> 
> *Coronas:*
> 
> ...


I can't stand CA...their ratings are partially about who is spending the most advertising dollars in their mag, so take them with a grain of salt. I also can't afford most of the stuff in there, whether it be the stogies, the liquor or whatever. I think that there needs to be a middle class/blue collar stogie mag that speaks the truth!


----------



## Nathan King (Nov 4, 2010)

primetime76 said:


> I can't stand CA...their ratings are partially about who is spending the most advertising dollars in their mag, so take them with a grain of salt. I also can't afford most of the stuff in there, whether it be the stogies, the liquor or whatever. I think that there needs to be a middle class/blue collar stogie mag that speaks the truth!


Well, I disagree that it's about advertising. Look at some of the newer smaller brands that have earned high ratings in the last two or three years; the ratings long preceded their ability to even think about spending money on advertising. Cubans often rate high, depite the fact that CA cannot take one advertising cent from Cuba.


----------



## primetime76 (Feb 8, 2011)

Then why does Padron rate higher than the Opus? I haven't had an issue of CA iin quite a while, but I do recall seeing LOTS of Padron ads (listing all of their ratings) and not so much for Fuente.


----------



## Habanolover (Feb 22, 2006)

primetime76 said:


> Then why does Padron rate higher than the Opus? I haven't had an issue of CA iin quite a while, but I do recall seeing LOTS of Padron ads (listing all of their ratings) and not so much for Fuente.


IMO the Padron should rate higher than the Opus. That is one thing about these ratings, you are taking one person's opinion. If his taste are similar to mine he will rank many cigars over an Opus. Hell, I would rank the Benchmade over the Opus and it is a mixed filler cigar. I think the ratings would turn out differently if they had a number of tasters and then used the average rating. Then again, maybe not. :mrgreen:


----------



## Matt1951 (Apr 25, 2010)

Any publicity is good publicity. No way I would have Casa Magna in a top 25 list, maybe at about 100. Look at the Puff top 100. But controversy is good for sales. Different people have different preferences, and will rank cigars differently. I thought CA used a group of people to rate the cigars?


----------



## BKDW (Nov 7, 2009)

Habanolover said:


> IMO the Padron should rate higher than the Opus. That is one thing about these ratings, you are taking one person's opinion. If his taste are similar to mine he will rank many cigars over an Opus. Hell, I would rank the Benchmade over the Opus and it is a mixed filler cigar. I think the ratings would turn out differently if they had a number of tasters and then used the average rating. Then again, maybe not. :mrgreen:


Sir,

I know we have not communicated much but you do have some very interesting opinions.

I believe I had that same size Opus X, and it was not good at all. I would absolutely take the Londres over it, at least for that particular time period.

I am sure that after a 3 year rest period, I might shine, but my signature says it all about that.


----------



## Seasick Sailor (Jan 3, 2011)

BKDW said:


> Sir,
> 
> I know we have not communicated much but you do have some very interesting opinions.
> 
> ...


:tpd:

People need to realize that the Padron Classic series is much better than its price point may lead you to believe.

An Opus may be better after a few years, but give me a Londres or Delicia any day of the week.


----------



## Habanolover (Feb 22, 2006)

BKDW said:


> Sir,
> 
> I know we have not communicated much but you do have some very interesting opinions.
> 
> ...


I really don't think that it is the Opus that I don't care for. There are very few Dominican cigars that I will go out of my way to smoke. I just prefer Nicaraguan tobacco over Dominican. Now the Anejo is a whole different story! :dr


----------



## bobby397 (Dec 25, 2010)

Price has alot to do with the score also, a casa magna is around 5-6 bucks as where opus range around 15-40 depending on where you get them.


----------



## Habanolover (Feb 22, 2006)

bobby397 said:


> Price has alot to do with the score also, a casa magna is around 5-6 bucks as where opus range around 15-40 depending on where you get them.


Yep, CA does factor price in which I think is rather asinine. When I smoke a cigar I do not let price sway me on whether it tastes good or not. It may have some effect on whether I make any future purchases but not on the taste.


----------



## baderjkbr (Jun 21, 2010)

I'm a fan of the Padrón Londres for a nice inexpensive cigar, but it beats the OpusX PerfecXion No. 4? These two cigars are in a different league. The OpusX is much smoother with greater complexity. The Londres has some slightly bitter notes not present in its larger ring guage brethren.

Discuss![/QUOTE]

I'm a big fan of the Padron Londres, but the construction on the Opus is better. As far as taste I would pick the Londre over the Opus. To each there own.


----------



## PunchMan6 (Feb 14, 2010)

First of all, I agree that CA is kinda biased in their reviews based on who advertizes with them...How many Padron, OpusX, RP, etc...ads do u see in one mag??? I read it every month so I cant put it down too much but I dont like the fact that they review CC's!!! Most people reading their mag cannot obtain CC's so WTF is the point of reviewing them??? Rev cigars that the general public can attain so they can go out and get em and enjoy them...
Im rambling, but I do think they are quite biased in their rev's and it kinda pisses me off..Id like to see a review on an Arganese CL3, or Diesel, or 5Vegas AAA, you know what I mean???? Anyhow, I digress....


----------



## MoreBeer (Feb 13, 2010)

CA is a cigar magazine that wants to be a GQ. I know when I see those Breitling and Bentley write-ups I always drain the bank account. LOL!


----------



## 1029henry (Jan 18, 2010)

Has Cigar Aficionado Gone Mad?

Yes.


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 16, 2011)

I read it today and see what you mean. They dont appeal to the "white collar" smoker. Too bad we are not all James Bond!


----------



## TylerDurden (Feb 20, 2011)

They are stupid. I saw some cigars which got foolishly low ratings and others which are just mediocre getting in the 90's.

Corona's were silly.

LP Dirty Rat got an 88 and so did an OpusX. The $3.00 Padron Maduro beat em out with an 89. Though I love Padron, it does not beat those 2 cigars. And cigars with higher ratings were Hoyo de Monterrey Excalibur (good cigar but not worthy of a 90) an Romeo y Julieta 1875 (again good cigar but not better than the others mentioned).

Why did they lower the rating of Padron 1926 40th Anni Maduro from the 2004 cigar of the year with like a 96 rating to down to a 90? And it got beat out by a Ghurka Ninja! So did the Ashton VSG!

*Facepalm*


----------



## Habanolover (Feb 22, 2006)

How does one determine that another's tastes are "stupid'?

I would also rate the $3.00 Padron over the Opus. Does that make me or my tastes "stupid"?


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 16, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> I read it today and see what you mean. They dont appeal to the "white collar" smoker. Too bad we are not all James Bond!


Maybe I meant Blue collar, I dont think I understand that concept lol. oops.


----------



## sengjc (Nov 15, 2010)

I don't particularly like the Londres but do admit that it is a good smoke for it's price especially after 6 months of humi time. My preference lies with the 3000 in the natural and 7000 in Maduro. For golfing and long drinks with friends hard to beat Executives in natural and Magnum in Maduro, but that's just me.

Also I think price is a factor to consider when buying cigars. For me the maths is simple 1 Opus = at least 3 Oliva Serie V. So I go for the Vs since the level of enjoyment is quite similar though the both sticks have different things to offer. I don't think I am of the level yet to fully appreciate an Opus X to the point whereby I can justify myself shelling out the extra for them. Cut the cloth to suit the garment, so to speak.

But this is not to say I will not buy, smoke and enjoy an Opus X if I happen on a good price for them or if I feel like indulging in something different on occasion. They are really good smokes after all and I do have a stash of these.


----------



## primetime76 (Feb 8, 2011)

Listen, CA isn't going to give a stick a bad rating if the maker of the stick is a heavy advertiser with the mag. It isn't going to happen. Padron himself could start collecting his turds, label them as the 100th (as opposed to the 80th), wrap them in leaves and sell them and CA would give it a rating over 90...because of the money that he provides the magazine through advertising. As far as Cubans go, they are not allowed here in the states, so there is nothing to dictate what they write about them...THOSE they can be brutally honest about with little to no reprecussion, unless of course, the cuban that they are reviewing also has a counterpart in the dominican, nicarauga, or any of the other "allowed" cigar making contries. It would be biting the hand that feeds you if you piss off your advertisers.


----------



## TylerDurden (Feb 20, 2011)

Habanolover said:


> How does one determine that another's tastes are "stupid'?
> 
> I would also rate the $3.00 Padron over the Opus. Does that make me or my tastes "stupid"?


Nope.

But if you did it because you got a higher pay check from Padron than Fuente then I would say yes.  Cigar Aficionado is well known for being bias towards their advertisers and sponsors.

Also they only smoke 1"-2" of a cigar and base their entire rating off of that.

ALSO the worst cigar I've ever had (puros indios) just got a rating of 88. It had a nice flavor of cardboard and old lawn clippings and based on their scores its 2 points short of a -A.

I like Cigar Press. They don't have a rating system, but they do review cigars and share their opinions of the cigars. But there is no "point" system.


----------



## tpharkman (Feb 20, 2010)

I am going to find a Londres sometime between now and next monday, then smoke it, then review it...I just have to see if you Londres lovers are smoking crack.

I think I even have the Opus the OP was talking about, with less than a year. I will smoke these suckers side by side. I need to know if your opinions are hallucinations or reality before I end up going mad myself.


----------



## swingerofbirches (Jan 12, 2010)

Habanolover said:


> ... That is one thing about these ratings, you are taking one person's opinion. If his taste are similar to mine ...


^^^ This is all anyone really needs to remember when they decide to get worked up over a CA review ... heck, any review. 
Reviews, plain and simple, are just things by which you can trend another person's tastes. After a few reviews you start to see whether a given reviewer's taste might suit you or be similar to yours.

CA is a mass appeal publication generally aimed at those who are casually interested in cigars or those to whom a cigar is an attache to a certain kind of lifestyle. 
If more folks would just take CA for what it is then they'd be disappointed a lot less often.


----------



## ROTHNH (Jun 21, 2009)

Not a CA fan -- haven't picked one up in years. I do read some of their articles and ratings on line on occasion, for comparison.

For me, it's all about value. 

The VSG is a great cigar as are the higher end Padrons, the Diamond Crowns, some Davidoffs, et al. But, for me, many cigars rank above them because those are a better value ... unfortunately, many (if not most) of those high value smokes are never mentioned or reviewed in CA.

Sadly, the "snob factor" at CA has a great deal to do with how the magazine rates a cigar so their opinions and ratings are and will remain far down on my scale compared with reputable opinions of respected sites such as Cigar Geeks, Puff and certain independent bloggers and reviewers.

And when you take out all the ads, the articles about expensive toys, zillion year old scotches and the like, the value of the actual magazine, to me, is damned close to zero.


----------



## Cigary (Oct 19, 2007)

TylerDurden said:


> They are stupid. I saw some cigars which got foolishly low ratings and others which are just mediocre getting in the 90's.
> 
> Corona's were silly.
> 
> ...





TylerDurden said:


> Nope.
> 
> But if you did it because you got a higher pay check from Padron than Fuente then I would say yes.  Cigar Aficionado is well known for being bias towards their advertisers and sponsors.
> 
> ...


I told myself earlier in the week I wasn't going to do this but I can't stop myself now...lol:boom:

First of all your logic is flawed on 6 principals:
*1*. * Deliberate creation of mystery; exaggeration; distortion; omission*
*2. Failure to specify*
*3. Wild speculation*
*4. Irrelevant conclusion or non sequitur*
*5. Argumentum ad hominem*
*6. Sweeping generalization*

*I'd put up the definition of each but that might cause *bdw1984 *( Ben ) to slap me around again for being tedious...lol. Suffice to say one can't use thier own opinion as fact...otherwise we'd have monkeys driving concrete dump trucks or thinking they were astronauts because somebody stuck one in a capsule.*



swingerofbirches said:


> ^^^ This is all anyone really needs to remember when they decide to get worked up over a CA review ... heck, any review.
> Reviews, plain and simple, are just things by which you can trend another person's tastes. After a few reviews you start to see whether a given reviewer's taste might suit you or be similar to yours.
> 
> CA is a mass appeal publication generally aimed at those who are casually interested in cigars or those to whom a cigar is an attache to a certain kind of lifestyle.
> If more folks would just take CA for what it is then they'd be disappointed a lot less often.


*Now this.....is not flawed logic but rather wisdom just like Donnie suggested earlier in the post. *

*Hoping this is enough smiley emoticons to keep things in the proper perspective.:smoke2::dance::kev::rapture:*


----------



## PUROGUY (Mar 7, 2011)

ROTHNH said:


> Not a CA fan -- haven't picked one up in years. I do read some of their articles and ratings on line on occasion, for comparison.
> 
> For me, it's all about value.
> 
> ...


 Couldn't have said it better myself brother.Spot on!


----------



## TylerDurden (Feb 20, 2011)

@Gary, I didn't understand half the words you said. This is the Internet not Senior thesis. 

NOOB LOLZ!

See how its done? 

Also I would say it is an fact that they are extremely biased in their reviews towards people who put the $$ in their pockets. Tastes are opinions, numbers are facts.


----------



## BMack (Dec 8, 2010)

I knew I would never trust CA's ratings after I had a Casa Magna.

I trust the reviews here more than CA's. Specifically if they come from certain people. Just ONE example: Ron bombed me within a couple weeks of joining Puff... EVERYTHING he sent, value smokes to premium was absolutely fantastic. If he says something is good, I believe him and put it on the list. We seem to have similar tastes in cigars. There are a few others too but I'll just point out Ron specifically because I'm sure there are others that follow any review he puts out there because of his experience.


----------



## Nathan King (Nov 4, 2010)

Cigary said:


> I told myself earlier in the week I wasn't going to do this but I can't stop myself now...lol:boom:
> 
> First of all your logic is flawed on 6 principals:
> *1*. *Deliberate creation of mystery; exaggeration; distortion; omission*
> ...


Excellent post. It really does boil down to opinion. Cigars are a very subjective topic - even among experts.


----------



## codykrr (Jul 30, 2010)

TylerDurden said:


> Nope.
> 
> But if you did it because you got a higher pay check from Padron than Fuente then I would say yes.  Cigar Aficionado is well known for being bias towards their advertisers and sponsors.
> 
> ...


No offense but can you back your claims?

I too would pick a londres over opus. any day of the week. I know its my taste, but I get more enjoyment, and better smoke, and a lot better flavor from a londres than I did opus.

3 dollar stick vs. a mediocre over hyped 12 dollar stick...

Yeah opus is nice with a year or so on it, but IMHO a 6 month old londres still beats a 1 or 1.5 year old opus. In my experience with both the opus would only catch up to the greatness(for me) of the londres after 2 years of age.

when I smoke a londres with a year or so on it its almost like heaven. I have almost exclusively smoked londres, A fuente short story and nubs for the past 6 months. mainly because thats all I can afford.

Even if I had 12 bucks to get a single opus, I wouldnt do it because of all the ones I have smoked...I got more from the cheaper sticks.

This is my opinion.

I am really interest in your claims about CA though. While I dont agree with some of there ratings, there all pretty spot on from what I have seen. except for rocky patel, but I cant stand those...tried them over and over, with bad results.


----------



## Cigary (Oct 19, 2007)

TylerDurden said:


> @Gary, I didn't understand half the words you said. This is the Internet not Senior thesis.
> *Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: and he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding. -- Bible, 'Proverbs' 17:28. *
> 
> NOOB LOLZ!
> ...


Tyler...all seriousness aside logic is something that needs to be practiced a lot more as speculation is like a disease...and asserting that CA does this without concrete proof just doesn't increase logic...it increases the likelihood that we can just wildly speculate anything we want without positive proof. I'm not a big fan of CA but I do read the magazine...some of the articles stretch the bounds of accuracy as well as the opinions they put out there. Remember that a lot of which they put out are opinions but to respond with your opinions which "sound" like facts are not facts...they are those items of a flawed logic that people tend to come out with more and more...it gets old...it's a waste time and it creates the illusion that it's accurate when it isn't.

When one has facts to back up claims or opinions then I am greatly interested in that persons post but when it's just one persons opinion over and over without the slightest bit of concrete evidence to support it then they become like *sounding brass* or a tinkling cymbal. People will just not take you seriously if what you say can't be proven.

Having said all that it's now time to go eat some fiber. :bounce:


----------



## TylerDurden (Feb 20, 2011)

codykrr said:


> No offense but can you back your claims?
> 
> I too would pick a londres over opus. any day of the week. I know its my taste, but I get more enjoyment, and better smoke, and a lot better flavor from a londres than I did opus.
> 
> ...


What claims are you interested in?


----------



## EARN (Feb 22, 2011)

I think its crazy that claims of reviews being weighted by ad dollars is based off the ads seen in the magazine. Everyones entitled to an opinion I guess.....


----------



## Herf N Turf (Dec 31, 2008)

I just recently purchased a partial box of cigars.

The seller had written a scathing review of them, some time ago.

CA and other internet reviews were similar.

I just happen to love this cigar and was very happy with my purchase.

Bottom line is, "smoke what you like and LOVE what you smoke".

Let others be only a touchstone. Taste what you taste and ENJOY it.


----------



## Cigary (Oct 19, 2007)

TylerDurden said:


> You take this stuff way to seriously and over analyze everything.
> 
> By the way everything you say is just filled with hypocrisy since you are literally trying to PREACH to me that anything anyone says is just an opinion, which in turns means that is just your opinion. So don't act like your right.
> 
> ...


Gosh...how did I know you were going to overplay your hand here..even with all of my emoticons. Tyler, for the record you have a real penchant for doing exactly what you are accusing me of and I don't really care if your opinion of me is what it is....my comments were for you to tone it down lately because you my friend feel as if your comments hold more crediblity than they really do. There are a lot of good brothers on here who tend to keep things " light" on here but you feel that you're opinions are 
Gospel.

Since you have put your toes on the diving board and you just want to jump into it I'll let you continue your "dive"...time for you to grow up my tense little friend.:tsk:


----------



## smelvis (Sep 7, 2009)

Cigary said:


> Gosh...how did I know you were going to overplay your hand here..even with all of my emoticons. Tyler, for the record you have a real penchant for doing exactly what you are accusing me of and I don't really care if your opinion of me is what it is....my comments were for you to tone it down lately because you my friend feel as if your comments hold more crediblity than they really do. There are a lot of good brothers on here who tend to keep things " light" on here but you feel that you're opinions are
> Gospel.
> 
> Since you have put your toes on the diving board and you just want to jump into it I'll let you continue your "dive"...time for you to grow up my tense little friend.:tsk:


Perhaps Gary they did not read this thread? How ya doing this weekend brother!

http://www.cigarforums.net/forums/v...earn-disagree-without-being-disagreeable.html


----------



## Mitch (Oct 2, 2009)

I just hate that I need to make a million dollars a year to afford all the crap they talk about. It's fine if you want to talk about fine scotch, but what about the stuff in the fourty and fifty dollar range. I only got the mag one year and never again. I skipped most the stuff. I couldn't care less about there stupiD cars and watches.


----------



## primetime76 (Feb 8, 2011)

Mitch said:


> I just hate that I need to make a million dollars a year to afford all the crap they talk about. It's fine if you want to talk about fine scotch, but what about the stuff in the fourty and fifty dollar range. I only got the mag one year and never again. I skipped most the stuff. I couldn't care less about there stupiD cars and watches.


Couldn't agree more...I can not come close to affording the newest Bugatti sports car or the newest Rolex watch that is covered with diamonds. Nor would the finer golf courses in the world want me tearing up their course. I have always maintained that there should be a cigar mag for the working class, blue collar Americans...things that we can afford!


----------



## TylerDurden (Feb 20, 2011)

primetime76 said:


> Couldn't agree more...I can not come close to affording the newest Bugatti sports car or the newest Rolex watch that is covered with diamonds. Nor would the finer golf courses in the world want me tearing up their course. I have always maintained that there should be a cigar mag for the working class, blue collar Americans...things that we can afford!


Kipp check out Cigar Press. They don't have as many issues but they stick to the tobacco in it. No reviews of fancy high end gadgets and other stuff. My main problem with CA is its a cigar magazine yet about 1/10 the magazine is cigar related, the rest is ads and other nonsense.


----------



## primetime76 (Feb 8, 2011)

:grouphug: Can't we all just get along? :hippie:


----------



## TonyBrooklyn (Jan 28, 2010)

TylerDurden said:


> _...post deleted.._.


Your wonderful use of the English language shows lack of intelligence. You remind me of another member here funny you both use exactly the same terminology. Gary is one of the most respected members on here. And a personal friend I have never given a negative R/G i am out for today but you can bet your life. First thing tomorrow you shall be my first! My guess is you are just here to stir the pot. Enjoy your short stay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:fu:fu:fu:fu:fu


----------



## tpharkman (Feb 20, 2010)

TonyBrooklyn said:


> Your wonderful use of the English language shows lack of intelligence. You remind me of another member here funny you both use exactly the same terminology. Gary is one of the most respected members on here. And a personal friend I have never given a negative R/G i am out for today but you can bet your life. First thing tomorrow you shall be my first! My guess is you are just here to stir the pot. Enjoy your short stay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> :fu:fu:fu:fu:fu


I already handled it for you Tony.


----------



## TonyBrooklyn (Jan 28, 2010)

tpharkman said:


> I already handled it for you Tony.


Thank you my brother!!!


----------



## bpegler (Mar 30, 2006)

Tyler,

Your tone is offensive. Some of the members you are ridiculing here are respected long term members of this community.

You sir, are neither.

As for opinions, certainly everyone has one, but some are educated and experienced opinions.

Perhaps if you listen better, one day you might join them.


----------



## asmartbull (Aug 16, 2009)

TylerDurden said:


> _...post deleted..._


"SNUG DOUCHE",,,,,no need for that here....mine is working....


----------



## bpegler (Mar 30, 2006)

asmartbull said:


> "SNUG DOUCHE",,,,,no need for that here....mine is working....


I could forgive his spelling.

Just not the attitude.


----------



## bobby397 (Dec 25, 2010)

I enjoy CA. I can't blame them for advertisement nor reviews on destinations because it's gets others outside of the cigar community to perhaps try and fall in love with a good smoke. And of course the advertisers in the mag are going to get alittle better treatment than others, they got to make aliving and it's no different than you or me taking a customer to lunch? Gotta keep them happy! Ethier way, in my opinion it's the best magazine for cigar lovers out at the moment...


----------



## Gorden Gecko (Dec 30, 2007)

CA is rag in IMO..90% ad's 10% cigars,I can buy a stick for the price of the mag..no thanx


----------



## bobby397 (Dec 25, 2010)

I paid $19 for an year subscription, and I believe the ad to column ratio is closer to 30% ads, 60% articles, 10% reviews. If the mag was sold with nothing but cigar reviews and columns, they would be bankrupt in less than a year


----------



## TonyBrooklyn (Jan 28, 2010)

:mod::mod::mod::mod::mod::mod::mod::mod::mod::mod::mod::mod::mod:


----------



## primetime76 (Feb 8, 2011)

This whole thread should just go away and the two of you should steer clear of each other...I do, however, not really like the "you are not a long term or respected"...that is just adding fuel to the fire. This should be a forum about expressing your opinions, where everyone is treated equally...and up until this thread it had been that way...hadn't seen a single fight. Sure we all have disagreements from time to time, but usually it is left at that. Can't we just forget about "has cigar aficionado gone mad" and move on with our puffing lives? There isn't anyone here that isn't a valuable contributor, in my eyes. 

Remember, though our opinions might differ, we are all here for the same reason...the love of the leaf! :hippie:


----------



## ouirknotamuzd (Jan 29, 2011)

is it my turn to rant?woohoo...here goes:anim_soapbox:
first of all, it's not CA's fault its a crap magazine..it's doing it's job...it's taking advertising money from cigar makers and then writing glorious things about their cigars to people who want to spend money every month just so they can have a magazine on their coffee table with a picture of Sponge Bob Square Pants on the cover smoking a Swisher Sweet cuz they think it looks sophisticated..I doubt if it's in CA's mission statement to protect the cigar smoking public from bad cigars...it's to get PAID..if Uncle Edgar's Tobacco Sheet Delights gave CA a ton of coin every month, then Uncle Edgar's Delights would be the greatest thing to ever grace the planet since they started putting pineapple chunks on pizza...magazine publishers are just trying to make a living like the rest of us....why let things like integrity and objectivity get in the way of that?
secondly, it still baffles me that magazines like CA are still in business.I mean, people shell out good money each month to read about what someone else thinks about a cigar...the last time I checked, there were 8,531 cigar reviews on Puff alone..and those are FREE...not to mention the countless number of cigar sites and blogs written every day by people who have no problem telling the cigar-smoking community what they think about a particular cigar..let's face it, the only thing that's truly free in this world is someone's opinion about something....but in all honesty, if someone wanted to pay me cash dollars to write a review on a cigar I'd do it....Hell, I'd do it just for the free cigar:smoke2:
thirdly, there's a very good philosophy on Puff I agree with wholeheartedly...."smoke what you like...like what you smoke"....there are billions of palates on this planet and no 2 are identical....what you may hate I may love, and I'm totally fine with that....all you bros are dead on about why a cigar is great or why it sucks...and so am I.....I respect everyone on this site for their love of the sweet leaf and I'd herf with any of you anytime...just leave your copy of CA at home:bounce:

Peaceeace::dude::beerchug:


----------



## bpegler (Mar 30, 2006)

TylerDurden said:


> Get your heads out your ass seriously.
> 
> What he did was uncalled for and this all could have been avoided if he wasn't such a jackass to me.


Perhaps it is this sort of personalized rude language that we are replying to. Please review the rules that clearly forbid this.

Like the post that was deleted, this has no place on these boards.


----------



## TonyBrooklyn (Jan 28, 2010)

bpegler said:


> Perhaps it is this sort of personalized rude language that we are replying to. Please review the rules that clearly forbid this.
> 
> Like the post that was deleted, this has no place on these boards.


Save your breath Bob!
I am afraid it is falling on deaf ears!
This guy P.M's me i explain to him what he has done wrong he then proceeds to insult me as well!:der: This is something best left for the Mods to handle!


----------



## bazookajoe (Nov 2, 2006)

We're back on track now and are returning to our regularly scheduled program...


----------



## TonyBrooklyn (Jan 28, 2010)

Thank you kindly sir!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## EARN (Feb 22, 2011)

Back to cigars!!


----------



## primetime76 (Feb 8, 2011)

ouirknotamuzd said:


> is it my turn to rant?woohoo...here goes:anim_soapbox:
> first of all, it's not CA's fault its a crap magazine..it's doing it's job...it's taking advertising money from cigar makers and then writing glorious things about their cigars to people who want to spend money every month just so they can have a magazine on their coffee table with a picture of Sponge Bob Square Pants on the cover smoking a Swisher Sweet cuz they think it looks sophisticated..I doubt if it's in CA's mission statement to protect the cigar smoking public from bad cigars...it's to get PAID..if Uncle Edgar's Tobacco Sheet Delights gave CA a ton of coin every month, then Uncle Edgar's Delights would be the greatest thing to ever grace the planet since they started putting pineapple chunks on pizza...magazine publishers are just trying to make a living like the rest of us....why let things like integrity and objectivity get in the way of that?
> secondly, it still baffles me that magazines like CA are still in business.I mean, people shell out good money each month to read about what someone else thinks about a cigar...the last time I checked, there were 8,531 cigar reviews on Puff alone..and those are FREE...not to mention the countless number of cigar sites and blogs written every day by people who have no problem telling the cigar-smoking community what they think about a particular cigar..let's face it, the only thing that's truly free in this world is someone's opinion about something....but in all honesty, if someone wanted to pay me cash dollars to write a review on a cigar I'd do it....Hell, I'd do it just for the free cigar:smoke2:
> thirdly, there's a very good philosophy on Puff I agree with wholeheartedly...."smoke what you like...like what you smoke"....there are billions of palates on this planet and no 2 are identical....what you may hate I may love, and I'm totally fine with that....all you bros are dead on about why a cigar is great or why it sucks...and so am I.....I respect everyone on this site for their love of the sweet leaf and I'd herf with any of you anytime...just leave your copy of CA at home:bounce:
> ...


I HAte FRUITY PIZZA!


----------



## Nathan King (Nov 4, 2010)

Wow. I really had no idea this thread would stir up such trouble and emotion. :sorry:


----------



## Gorden Gecko (Dec 30, 2007)

I had no idea people had such a strong personal connection to a magazine.Im sure this guy would be happy to hear this...


----------



## Blaylock-cl (Apr 28, 2006)

primetime76 said:


> This whole thread should just go away and the two of you should steer clear of each other...I do, however, not really like the_ "you are not a long term or respected"_...that is just adding fuel to the fire. This should be a forum about expressing your opinions, where everyone is treated equally...and up until this thread it had been that way...hadn't seen a single fight. Sure we all have disagreements from time to time, but usually it is left at that. Can't we just forget about "has cigar aficionado gone mad" and move on with our puffing lives? There isn't anyone here that isn't a valuable contributor, in my eyes.
> 
> Remember, though our opinions might differ, we are all here for the same reason...the love of the leaf! :hippie:


This wasn't adding "fuel on the fire" at all. Just one member reminding a trouble maker that when someone ridicules a long, respected member, we're absolutely going to defend that person. You don't gain respect unless it's earned.

Treating someone equally is fine, but there's a difference between expressing ones opinions and deliberately posting to cause trouble. I applaud Bob and others who step in to remind people about this.

_"There isn't anyone here that isn't a valuable contributor, in my eyes."_

Usually, this is the case. In this particular case, not at all. He got what he deserved.


----------



## piperdown (Jul 19, 2009)

Has CA gone mad?

I don't know. I don't know what the the cash ratio is to which cigar company is paying versus what they are kicking out in reviews. Without this information I would not be able to make a judgement about bias. We all suspect bias but without this kind of information the best that can be stated is speculative at best.

Would I say that a 2009 Padron londres is better than a 2004 OpusX? Possibly...we all talk about different years as being better than others in the "other" forum without taking into consideration that the vast majority of cigar makers can have a not so great year. With my novice palette I've noticed a difference from one year to the next with Padron 1964; heck, I even expect it. I grew up on a farm and we not only measured bushels but protein content too. They vary from year to year. Same goes for the other crops we raised. I would expect nothing less in the tobacco fields.

I believe, but _don't know_, that CA plays into whoever has the most advertising revenue, and until I see numbers as mentioned above it's just an opinion........so I take what I read with a grain of salt and move on.

Absolutley no reason to stoop to a non-civil discussion on this. We are, I hope, all adults that realize there is a living human being on the other side of the discussion. I certainly wouldn't disparage someone from my cigar club with such language when we are out having a smoke and we disagree. We simply disagree on something and move on.


----------



## teedles915 (Jun 18, 2009)

Jeez that guy got all worked up over a little gentlemen's agreement. 

Gary you showed exactly the kind of person you are by not taking it to the inmature level that he did. You sir are a well respected member of this community, and after this thread I don't think anyone can doubt why. I tried to bump you but I'm all out, but I hope the other guys made up for it for me.

Now Gary just so you know, if you are gonna use those huge words you gotta help a brother out with what they mean. I am still confused after reading that post.

:banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:


----------



## miket156 (Feb 2, 2011)

Interesting opinions concerning CA. Being that they rate a lot of Cuban cigars in the magazine, both print and on-line, I doubt that adds very much credibility to the statement that CA leverages its advertising $$ to their reviews and ratings. It really doesn't matter to me, I don't subscribe to the printed magazine. 

However, I have found that their rating cigars is a good tool for someone like me that lives in an area where there is not a large B&M that carries a wide selection of cigars that I can buy to try without buying a box. I also look at the ratings of other rating systems (Smoke Magazine, Cigar Insider, Cigar Inspector). Generally, any cigar that has a high rating is at least a decent smoke. I can look cigars over and determine where it comes from, what kind of filler and what type of wrapper it has and select cigars to try based on my preferences. The information on line is valuable because I can eliminate the mild cigars and light wrappers from my choices because I like a medium or full bodied cigar most of the time. I also prefer a wider ring cigar to a narrow ring cigar because they are more flavorsome. 

Those of us that are not into Bentley money reallly don't need CA printed magazine. Other resources like this and other Forums are swimming in good information with a variety of opinions. But its all good, and its all free. arty:


Cheers,


Mike T.


----------

